1

We are maintaining our test cases in testlink. For a given sprint we write functional test cases for features and regression suite update accordingly. Now we are in the process of starting automation. Our plan is to convert regression suite to automation. How to maintain the mapping between regression manual test cases and automation Test suite test cases. How to maintain this frequently

0

I would delete the manual test case after it has been converted into an automated test. Automated tests should be run automated at least before deployment, preferably after each change.

Keeping the mapping feels as administration for the sake of administration. Therefor I would like the challenge you to think about if you really need it, probably you don't.

  • 1
    Additionally, it's always good to remember that one cannot automate testing strictly (just the checking part). Depending on how these documents are written, I would say that instead of removing, one should edit them, based on risk analysis. – João Farias Mar 6 at 9:05
  • @JoãoFarias A manual regression suite is also just checking, not? – Niels van Reijmersdal Mar 6 at 9:36
  • I would call a folder with exploratory charters a "manual suite"; and it's definitely not only checking. – João Farias Mar 6 at 9:39
  • 1
    @JoãoFarias Sounds like unrelated to this question. Not sure how you are going to convert exploratory charters to automated tests. Lets stay on topic. – Niels van Reijmersdal Mar 6 at 9:52
  • In our suite , we still keep the manual test cases as a documentation of the automated cases so new members can have a quick look at the manual test cases before diving in the automation code. – Vishal Aggarwal Mar 6 at 23:51
0

I will suggest a possible path for some folks in this situation.
This may not work for all situations.

Plan for the future, don't just repeat the past

If you simply convert the manual cases to automated ones you will solve one problem but create others.
You will reduce the need for manual testing but you will:

  • Introduce the need for quality engineer to maintain the automation. Engineers are expensive.
  • Create flaky, brittle UI tests. UI tests fail intermittently in every place I've worked
  • Miss a perfect opportunity to start doing Agile Testing and dividing up tests into Unit, Integrated and UI
  • Miss the huge benefits that come from manual testing when humans spot things that are awry
  • Likely still want to do some manual testing in an exploratory charter approach

You may get push-back to this saying we'll do that in phase II
Phase II doesn't usually happen in my experience.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.